Annulment
Annulment is a legal procedure for declaring a marriage null or void. Unlike divorce, it is usually retroactive, meaning that an annulled marriage is considered to be invalid from the beginning almost as if it had never taken place (though some jurisdictions provide that the marriage is only void from the date of the annulment; for example, this is the case in section 12 of the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 in England and Wales). In legal terminology, an annulment makes a void marriage or a voidable marriage null. Void vs voidable marriage A difference exists between a void marriage and a voidable marriage . A void marriage is a marriage which has no legal recognition (was not legally valid in the first place, i.e. is ). Such a marriage is automatically null, although a declaration of nullity is required to establish this. The process of obtaining a declaration of nullity is similar to an annulment process. Despite its retroactive nature, children born before an annulment are considered legitimate in many countries. Reasons for a void marriage may include, depending on jurisdiction, consanguinity (incestual marriage),bigamy ,group marriage ,child marriage . A is a marriage which can be canceled at the option of one of the parties. It is a valid marriage, but is subject to cancellation if contested in court by one of the parties to the marriage. The validity of a voidable marriage can only be made by one of the parties to the marriage; thus, a voidable marriage cannot be annulled after the death of one of the parties. A marriage can be voidable for a variety of reasons, depending on jurisdiction. Forced/coerced marriages are usually voidable. In countries where is influenced by (especially Roman Catholicism) there can be numerous reasons for a marriage to be voidable. The principal difference between a void and voidable marriage is that, in the case of the former, because it is invalid from the beginning, it can be voided ex-officio; while in the case of the latter it is only the spouse himself/herself who can ask for an annulment (in some cases such as if the spouse is a minor or mentally disabled a third party representative such as a parent, legal guardian or child protective service can start an annulment acting as the legal representative of said spouse). These differences are very relevant, because they represent the official policy on issues such as for instance: if such marriage is classified legally as void - then the state can cancel it even against the will of the spouses; if it is voidable - then the state cannot act in the absence of an application by a spouse even if the state knows the marriage is forced. Christianity Anglicanism The church of england, the mother church of the worldwide , historically had the right to grant annulments, while divorces were "only available through an Act of Parliament." Examples in which annulments were granted by the Anglican Church included being under age, having committed fraud, using force, and lunacy. Catholicism In the canon law of the Catholic Church, an annulment is properly called a "Declaration of Nullity", because according to Catholic doctrine, the marriage of baptisted persons is a and, once consummated and thereby confirmed, cannot be dissolved as long as the parties to it are alive. A "Declaration of Nullity" is not dissolution of a marriage, but merely the legal finding that a valid marriage was never contracted. This is analogous to a finding that a contract of sale is invalid, and hence, that the property for sale must be considered to have never been legally transferred into another's ownership. A divorce, on the other hand, is viewed as returning the property after a consummated sale. The may dispense from a marriage since, having been ratified (ratum) but not consummated (sed non consummatum), it is not absolutely unbreakable. A valid is not regarded as a sacrament, however, if at least one of the parties is not . In certain circumstances it can be dissolved in cases of and , but only for the sake of the higher good of the spiritual welfare of one of the parties. Although an annulment is thus a declaration that "the marriage never existed", the Church recognizes that the relationship was a , which gives rise to "natural obligations". In canon law, children conceived or born of either a valid or a putative marriage are considered legitimate, and illegitimate children are legitimized by a putative marriage of their parents, as by a valid marriage. Certain conditions are necessary for the marriage contract to be valid in canon law. Lack of any of these conditions makes a marriage invalid and constitutes legal grounds for a declaration of nullity. Accordingly, apart from the question of diriment impediments dealt with below, there is a fourfold classification of contractual defects: defect of form, defect of contract, defect of willingness, defect of capacity. For annulment, proof is required of the existence of one of these defects, since canon law presumes all marriages are valid until proven otherwise. Canon law stipulates to marriage. A diriment impediment prevents a marriage from being validly contracted at all and renders the union a , while a prohibitory impediment renders a marriage . The union resulting is called a . An invalid marriage may be subsequently , either by simple convalidation (renewal of consent that replaces invalid consent) or by sanatio in radice ("healing in the root", the retroactive dispensation from a diriment impediment). Some impediments may be dispensed from, while those de jure divino (of divine law) may not be dispensed. In some countries, such as , in which Catholic Church marriages are automatically transcribed to the civil records, a Church declaration of nullity may be granted the and treated as the equivalent of a civil divorce. Methodism Methodist Theology Today, edited by Clive Marsh, states that: Islam Faskh means "to annul" in . It is a -granted procedure to judicially rescind a marriage. A man does not need grounds to divorce his wife in Islam. To divorce, he can simply invoke Talaq and part with the he gave her before marriage; or, he can invoke Lian doctrine in case of adultery, by bringing four witnesses who saw the wife committing adultery (which is almost impossible) or by self-certify and swear by Allah four times, and Sharia requires the court to grant divorce requested by the man. Also, Sharia does grant a Muslim woman simple ways to end her marital relationship and without declaring the reason. Faskh or (kholo) (annulment) doctrine specifies certain situations when a Sharia court can grant her request and annul the marriage. Grounds for Faskh are: (a) irregular marriage (fasid), (b) forbidden marriage (batil), © the marriage was contracted by non-Muslim husband who adopted Islam after marriage, (d) the husband or wife became an after marriage, (e) husband is unable to consummate the marriage. In each of these cases, the wife must provide four independent witnesses acceptable to the Qadi (religious judge), who has the discretion to declare the evidence unacceptable. In Sunni school of jurisprudence (), cruelty, disease, life-threatening ailment and desertion are additional approved grounds for the wife or the husband to seek annulment of the marriage. In these cases too, the wife must provide two male witnesses or one male and two female witnesses or in some cases four witnesses, acceptable to the Qadi (religious judge), who has the discretion to declare the evidence unacceptable. In certain circumstances, an unrelated Muslim can petition a Qadi to void (faskh) the marriage of a Muslim couple who may not want the marriage to end. For example, in case the third party detects apostasy from Islam by either husband or wife (through blasphemy, failure to respect Sharia, or conversion of husband or wife or both from Islam to Christianity, etc.). In cases of apostasy, in addition to annulment of the marriage, the apostate may face additional penalties such as death sentence, imprisonment and civil penalties unless they repent and return to Islam. United States State of New York Main article: provides for: Incestuous and void marriages (DRL §5); Void marriages (DRL §6) Voidable marriages (DRL §7). The for annulment of a voidable marriage in is generally (DRL §140 (e)). There are other arguments; see . Fraud generally means the intentional deception of the by the in order to induce the Plaintiff to marry. The misrepresentation must be substantial in nature, and the Plaintiff's consent to the marriage predicated on the Defendant’s statement. The perpetration of the fraud (prior to the marriage), and the discovery of the fraud (subsequent to the marriage) must be proven by corroboration of a witness or other external proof, even if the Defendant admits guilt (DRL §144). The time limit is three years (not one year). This does not run from the date of the marriage, but the date the fraud was discovered, or could reasonably have been discovered. A marriage (one where one party was still married at the time of the second marriage) as well as an marriage is void ab initio (not legal from its inception). However, there is still the need for an "Action to Declare the Nullity of a Void Marriage" (DRL §140 (a)), upon which the Court, after proper pleadings, renders a judgment that the marriage is void. There may be such as a and even if the court finds it equitable to order such relief. State of Nevada In , the qualifications for annulment include: a that was void at the time performed (such as blood relatives, ), lacked or is based on some kind of . See also . To file actions based on , you must have separated from your as soon as you learned of the fraud. Annulments in Nevada require a of at least 6 weeks, including a signed of having been living in Nevada for that amount of time. England and Wales England and Wales provides for both void and voidable marriages. * Void marriage: spouses are closely related; one of the spouses was under 16; one of the spouses was already married or in a civil partnership * Voidable marriage: non-; no proper consent to entering the marriage (forced marriage); the other spouse had a sexually transmitted disease at the time of marriage; the woman was pregnant by another man at the time of marriage Section 13 of the provides for certain restrictions in regard to the possibility of annulling voidable marriages, including where the petitioner knew of the "defect" and of the possibility of annulment, but induced the respondent to believe that he would not seek an annulment; or where it would be "unjust" to the respondent to grant the decree of nullity. There is usually a time of three years from the date of the marriage in order to institute the proceedings. Australia Since 1975, Australian law provides only for void marriages. Before 1975, there were both void and voidable marriages. Today, under the Family Law Act 1975(Cth.) a decree of nullity can only be made if a marriage is void. A marriage is void if: * one or both of the parties were already married at the time (i.e. ) * the parties are in a prohibited relationship (i.e. closely related such as ) * the parties did not comply with the marriage laws in the jurisdiction where they were married (note that although a marriage contracted abroad is in general considered valid in Australia, in certain cases, such as when there are serious contradictions with the marriage laws of Australia, the marriage is void) * one or both of the parties were under-age and did not have the necessary approvals, (minimum marriageable age is 16, but 16 and 17 years-olds need special court approval) or * one or both of the parties were . France In , a country of tradition, annulment features prominently in law, and can be obtained for many reasons. The law provides for both void and voidable marriages. (see articles 180 to 202, and articles 144, 145, 146, 146-1, 147, 148, 161, 162, 163, and 164 of the ) * void marriage: forced marriage (not to be confused with consent obtained under which makes a marriage voidable not void); underage marriage; bigamy; incestuous marriage; lack of legal competence of the registrar; and clandestine marriage (i.e. hiding the marriage from the public, no witnesses present) * voidable marriage: vices of consent, i.e. consent obtained under deception/by misrepresentation of one's personal characteristics, personal past, intentions after marriage, etc., where the deceived spouse discovers after the marriage the deceit (given a very broad interpretation by the courts); and failure to secure the authorization of the person who should have authorized the marriage (i.e. lack of authorization of guardians of a mentally challenged spouse) Multiple annulments had three of his six marriages annulled. These marriages were to (on the grounds that she had already been married to his brother—although this annulment is not recognized by the Catholic Church); (on the grounds that she had allegedly seduced him with witchcraft and was unfaithful—not wishing to execute his legal wife, he offered her an easy death if she would agree to an annulment); and (on the grounds of non- and the fact that she had previously been engaged to someone else). never had her marriage annulled. She had committed adultery with during the marriage, and she had flirted with members of his court. Because of this, on November 22, 1541, it was proclaimed at Hampton Court that she had "forfeited the honor and title of Queen," and was from then on to be known only as the Lady Catherine Howard. Under this title she was executed for three months later. Controversies The grounds of annulment in regard to a voidable marriage, and indeed the concept of a voidable marriage itself, have become controversial in recent years. According to a paper in Singapore Academy of Law Journal: : "Where divorce is available to all, it seems somewhat inconsistent to favour some groups of unhappily married people by giving them the privilege of choosing whether to put an end to their misery by way of annulment or by way of divorce. It is also worthy of note that some judges, like Coomaraswamy J. in Chua Ai Hwa (mw), have noted that some of the grounds making a marriage voidable have tended to be abused by parties who hope the court will grant the petition on fairly skimpy evidence simply because the petition is not defended."